Messages

331

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over

« on: January 04, 2013, 05:33:37 AM »

"Q:why did the 5d Mk III take so long to come out? A: Because knew we could keep selling the 5D Mk II, it was actually ready last year, but we just let it sit on the shelf until now, same with the 24-70mm Mk II" "Q:Why don't you release a updated 1Dx with f/8 AF points, A: because people will buy our cameras regardless, we aren't going to implement a feature if it's not going to be a money maker".

I know you trolling... I am playing along, and the above is something you made up.
So if you going to make something up, atleast make it sound plausible or else your troll ceases to be fun!

332

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over

« on: January 04, 2013, 04:55:58 AM »

Which four words?

333

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 04, 2013, 01:58:25 AM »

I think this is where I get flamed out to Jupiter, or laughed out of sight... 

I am trying to figure out what Canon's digital photography strategy actually is, who their market researchers (if they have any) actually bother talking to, and why they keep shooting themselves in the foot.  (And I am sorry that I'm about to wander off topic a bit, but stay with me...)

Canon has recently launched 2 cameras which, for them, are absolute turkeys: the mirror less interchangeable lens EOSM, and the large-sensor G1X. Lots of R&D money wasted in being the last major brand to enter a markets sector, then doing so with a poor product. (Pause for flames).

Meanwhile, in the SLR space they introduce yet another variant camera, the 6D. This is really just a silly compromise - it is selling at the price the 5D should have been offered for, but with a stack of useful features held back. (Pause for more flames).

And in the lens space, they want to charge $11,000 for this? If it had been 5 or even 6 thousand, I could have conceded it made sense. If it was off-the-scale awesome, then 7500 with some steep cash back options.

But the fact remains that this is likely to sell in only small numbers because of that price tag. I cannot help but wonder if the fact that Canon's last annual profits came in at under a billion are down to a very poor product strategy. They are building products that people don't seem to want (G1X a great example), then when they find one that should have the potential to sell like hot cakes (this 200-400mm) they go and price it out of the market. The amateur who has pushed his or her budget to a 5DIII is hardly going to spend several multiples of the price of the camera on a single lens, no matter how good it is.

I've been a loyal Canon user for many years, and owned the 10D, 40D and now have a 7, but I just fail to see the point of this.

Emperor Canon of the Camera Kingdom has no clothes on...

Naaaaa. This lens will be extremely popular I believe. Flames or not. Pausing for them or not.
People who do not want to pay for this have the 100-400 at their disposal...

And is 6D not selling very well? I thought it was..!!

334

Canon General / Re: Record Spending Into Camera Gear - HIGHEST

« on: January 04, 2013, 01:31:09 AM »

I do not like this thread.
I do not want to talk about this.

335

Canon General / Re: Single point auto focus

« on: January 04, 2013, 01:17:14 AM »

My focus point selection varies all the time depending upon the situation.

336

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS in Stock at B&H Photo

« on: January 04, 2013, 12:38:11 AM »

...IF u don't like Canon strategy or product's there is an alternative solutions & it is good as Canon just no need to stick with it & complain how bad they are.

I can complain all I want... and I will give my opinion, and my opinion of your opinion.  And I will stick with Canon and the products that make sense and are relatively well priced.  This is not it, and I will, as I see fit, complain about it wherever I want!

If you don't want to read my complaints, don't read them, but don't tell me not to complain.
Rafa.

Yes Rafa. Go for it.

337

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:50:57 PM »

The easiest way I can explain this is that this means that you just essentially paid $14,000 for your 5D Mark III, $4,000 for your 7D, $ 2,500 for your 60D, $7,000 for your 5D Mark II, and $9,000 for your 24-70mm Mk II etc.

What Canon has done is they have simply hidden the cost of ownership and made it so that you are essentially taking a long complex loan against yourself.

Clearly, I'm not an economic analyst. Maybe if I was one, I could comprehend how a 5DII that I paid for with $2400 in cash, used for two years, then sold for $1500 in cash, somehow cost me a hidden $7000 that I loaned to myself.  I think I'll stick to elucidating the biochemical workings of the human brain, economics is too confusing.   

338

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:29:23 PM »

I could personally care less about their pricing games, I make enough to buy hundreds Canon pro bodies a year and have enough left over to live comfortably after throwing those in the trash, but I think it's worth taking note of this craziness.

Kind sir could I please inbox you my address for your trash purposes? Not that it would matter to you, but I would pay for postage. Thanks for your consideration.

And yeah, I agree that if a product price can come down within 5 months of its launch, then it was overpriced to begin with. I think that is what this thread is about....

339

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:17:31 PM »

i also don't see any need to stop down my 300mm 2.8, but if you feel like you do, go right ahead.
 Did this lens have that tele lock in the earlier photos? i don't remember it, but i might have just missed it.

Yes the lock was always there.

340

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:15:15 PM »

I debated this vs. the 500/4 II vs the 600/4 II.  Since the 200-400 wasn't available (and technically, I suppose still is not available), I didn't consider it too strongly.  But even so, the 600mm is more useful, to me. 

With the 1D X (and soon 5DIII) having f/8 AF capability, this lens would be more interesting if it could take a 1.4xIII, but the design precludes that.  Personally, I'd rather have 600mm at f/4 than 560mm at f/5.6.

But I'm interested to see how this lens performs, regardless...

Ideal situation 600 prime at f4 is better, AGREE. But for me the flexibility of this lens is very welcome. Provided of of course the IQ is close to the prime... When shooting wildlife in open plains even the 600 falls short many times. So the 200-400 and 800 seem ideal to me.

341

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:08:49 PM »

seriously, show me how to reproduce this in actual shooting. I've never seen anything remotely like banded skies in any of my 5D Mark II shots.

I thought everyone knew. 

• Set your camera to M mode
• Point it at the sky
• From the metered exposure, reduce by 4 or more stops (note, some cameras do not properly display this on the meter in the viewfinder, so you may need to be an experienced enough photographer to calculate a 4-stop underexposure in your head)
• Take the picture
• During post-processing, raise the exposure by 4 or more stops (note, some RAW converters do not allow you to adjust exposure by that much, notably, Canon's own DPP is restricted to just 2 stops - and of course, that's by design, because Canon knows that their sensor performance breaks down when pushed by 4 EV, so they are taking steps to mask their own inadequacies...but I digress).
• Now, look at the image - you'll notice the banding

Once you know the steps, it's easy to be affected by this horribly common problem that destroys the IQ of the 5DII.  That's why I sold that piece of crap camera.  All that horrible banding in the skies when I underexposed my images by 4 stops.



Sorry, I just couldn't help myself...   

Hahahahaha! Well said...

342

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS in Stock at B&H Photo

« on: January 03, 2013, 11:03:45 PM »

I enjoy using Canon products (never tried Nikon) but am not a 'fan boy'.

I have enough respect and faith in Canon to believe that this lens will have distinct optical advantages over the 24-105. Why else would they make this?

Lets see how the reviews come out. Brian...

343

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 03, 2013, 10:51:16 PM »

Is it me or the lens does not look that huge? I would be delighted if it is not huge.

It looks "small" to me as well.  You can find some comparison photos online that show it beside the 400 2.8 and 600 4.0.  The front element diameter makes it look a bit "wimpy" to me. 

http://images.wantmi.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Canon_super_tele_comparison.jpg

Thanks for that. Yeah it is "small".
But some people have actually touched it and say it's big. Lets see... Hope the wait is close to over.

344

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 03, 2013, 07:51:07 AM »

Is it me or the lens does not look that huge? I would be delighted if it is not huge.

345

Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: January 03, 2013, 07:45:57 AM »

The time has come to go bust.